Re: walsender.c comment with no context is hard to understand

On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 4:19 PM Bertrand Drouvot
<bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 11:20:45AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 11:08 AM Bertrand Drouvot
> > <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 08:46:19AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > This sounds better but it is better to add just before we determine
> > > > am_cascading_walsender as is done in the attached. What do you think?
> > >
> > > Thanks! LGTM.
> > >
> >
> > I would like to push this to HEAD only as we don't see any bug that
> > this change can prevent. What do you think?
> >
>
> Yeah, fully agree. I don't see how the previous check location could produce
> any bug.
>

Hi,

Since the patch was pushed, one recent failure was observed in BF
member rorqual [1]. but this is probably unrelated to the push because
we found the same failure also occurred in April [2].

======
[1] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=rorqual&dt=2024-07-09%2003%3A46%3A44
[2] https://buildfarm.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/show_stage_log.pl?nm=rorqual&dt=2024-04-18%2006%3A52%3A07&stg=recovery-check

Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia